High Court Judges: Judicial Robes

Lord Patten: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What are the number and types of judicial robes that a High Court judge is expected to acquire upon appointment; and what sums are available from public funds for their purchase.

Lord Irvine of Lairg: On appointment a High Court judge is expected to acquire robes for summer and winter use and also robes for ceremonial use. A High Court judge is entitled to an allowance of £13,954 towards the cost.
	I intend to publish on 8 May a public consultation paper on court working dress worn by judges, advocates and court staff. I wish to determine the views of the general public on these matters, as well as those of the judiciary, lawyers and court staff.

Illegal Meat Imports

Baroness Byford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Why the Crown Prosecution Service has only prosecuted three people caught importing illegal meat products; and whether they consider this a reasonable proportion of the 2,000 seizures (amounting to 27,000 kilograms) in 2002.

Lord Goldsmith: The Crown Prosecution Service does not have primary responsibility for prosecuting people for the importation of illegal meat products. Responsibility for prosecutions currently lies with local authorities and HM Customs & Excise.

Zimbabwe and China: Human Rights

Lord Moynihan: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they intend to sponsor or support resolutions critical of human rights records in (a) Zimbabwe and (b) China at this year's annual United Nations Commission on Human Rights in Geneva.

Baroness Amos: The European Union attempted to table a resolution on Zimbabwe at last year's session of the UN Commission on Human Rights. The EU plans to do so again this year. The EU has no plans to table a resolution on China. If another delegation were to table such a resolution, we would in principle support it. lynne

Afghanistan: Witness Protection

Lord Avebury: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What proposals they have for a witness protection programme for individuals with knowledge of the murders of prisoners of war in Afghanistan, detailed in the report by Physicians for Human Rights.

Baroness Amos: None. The protection of possible witnesses would be a matter for the Afghan authorities.

Unlawful Combatants

Baroness Williams of Crosby: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether "unlawful combatants" are being held at the United States base on Diego Garcia or on United States vessels around the island; if so, whether they are being held under control of Her Majesty's Government or of the United States; what is the legal basis on which they are held; and whether they are being granted the legal rights appropriate to their status.

Baroness Amos: The United States authorities have assured us that they are not detaining anyone they regard as an "unlawful combatant" in Diego Garcia or on any vessel in the British Indian Ocean Territory. The United States Government would need to ask for our permission to bring any such person to Diego Garcia and it has not done so.

Gujarat: Freedom of Religion

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they are discussing with the government of India the State of Gujarat's "Freedom of Religion" legislation and whether it infringes existing conventions on human rights; and, if not, whether they will do so as a matter of urgency.

Baroness Amos: We are aware of Gujarat's Freedom of Religion Bill, which we understand has now passed into law.
	India is a secular country and the right to freedom of religion is enshrined in its constitution. But we are concerned that this legislation might in practice discourage Gujarati citizens from adopting the religion of their choice, and as such might limit their religious freedoms as outlined in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which India has ratified.
	We have had no discussions with the Government of India on this issue. But our High Commission in New Delhi will closely monitor the implementation of this law by the Gujarati authorities, and we will raise it with EU Partners. lynne

United Nations Emergencies Unit for Ethiopia

Baroness Masham of Ilton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Baroness Amos on 24 March (WA 47) that they "do not support coercive family planning practices", whether they will cease funding the United Nations Emergencies Unit for Ethiopia, which said on 20 March that "it might be worth contemplating how far a system of reward and punishment could help implement family planning strategies".

Baroness Amos: DfID contributed £250,000 in March 2002 to the UNEUE to help it provide information on populations at risk and identify areas of unmet need in terms of recovery and development, for the ultimate benefit of marginalised Ethiopians.
	The Government do not support coercive family planning practices. All UK assistance for health programmes is provided in support of the principles of free and informed choice set out at the International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD) in Cairo in 1994, and reaffirmed at the Cairo plus 5 meeting in New York in 1999.
	In a statement made following the report referred to, the UNEUE has reiterated in the clearest possible terms that it will promote the perspective that coercion, incentives or disincentive have no place in population and development programmes. The UNEUE has apologised unreservedly for the comments made in the report referred to and acknowledged UNFPA for calling its attention to the error.

Sudan

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they are discussing with the Government of the Sudan the arrest on 11 March of a journalist from the English-language Khartoum Monitor; and whether it is internationally acceptable that individuals can be held without charge for renewable periods of 123 days.

Baroness Amos: Her Majesty's Ambassador to Khartoum raised the case of Edward Terso, the detained Khartoum Monitor journalist, on 27 March as part of the wider EU-Sudan dialogue. Mr Terso was subsequently released on 29 March. The embassy regularly raises human rights issues, including detention without charge and the freedom of the press in particular, with the Government of Sudan. bjc

Sudan

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether the United Nations Rapporteur for Human Rights in the Sudan has been able to visit all areas in the Sudan that he wished to see; whether they are supporting the United Nations resolution to continue his mandate; and, if so, whether they will seek worldwide support for this position.

Baroness Amos: The United Nations Special Rapporteur for Human Rights in Sudan has welcomed the co-operation extended by the Government of Sudan and the Sudan People's Liberation Movement/Army during his visits to Sudan.
	We take a close interest and play an active role in the promotion of human rights in Sudan. This includes our strong support for the work of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights there. The UK has until now been the main contributor of funding for the Office of the HCHR in Khartoum. The UK has supported successive EU-sponsored resolutions at the UN Commission on Human Rights and the UN General Assembly. We believe that it is important to continue the mandate of the special rapporteur and shall be working for agreement to this during the current session of the CHR in Geneva.

Sudan

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether the British Embassy in Khartoum has yet been able to complete its fact-finding visit to Darfur; and, if so, what are its conclusions.

Baroness Amos: Our ambassador has requested permission to travel to Darfur and will do so as soon as possible.
	The embassy in Khartoum continues to discuss the situation in Darfur with a wide range of Government and National Congress party officials, in addition to Darfur MPs and other local representatives.

Sudan

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they are supporting moves to strengthen and expand the verification and monitoring team in southern Sudan, in particular to enable it to investigate reports of abduction, rape and displacement of civilians.[HL2381)
	 Question number missing in Hansard, possibly truncated question.

Baroness Amos: Her Majesty's Government welcomed the establishment on 4 February of the Verification Monitoring Team (VMT). The VMT will monitor alleged violations of the Memorandum of Understanding on cessation of hostilities signed on 15 October 2002. The UK will support its important work and has pledged 500,000 US dollars towards the establishment of the Verification Monitoring Team. We are also looking to contribute personnel to the operation.
	The US-led Civilian Protection Monitoring Team (CPMT) is responsible for monitoring the March 2002 agreement to refrain from attacks against civilians. On 15 March the Government of Sudan and the Sudan People's Liberation Army agreed to extend that agreement until 31 March 2004.

Guantanamo Bay

Lord Oakeshott of Seagrove Bay: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Under the jurisdiction of the courts of which country the British subjects held by the United States at Guantanamo Bay fall.

Baroness Amos: Last month the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia upheld the US District Court decision that no US court has jurisdiction to grant habeas corpus relief to non-US citizens held by the US in Guantanamo Bay. There is however likely to be an appeal against this decision to the US Supreme Court. The US have established a system of military commissions which, where appropriate, will be able to prosecute the detainees but no such prosecutions have yet been carried out. It seems unlikely that the court of any other state would consider itself to have jurisdiction over persons held at Guantanamo Bay.

Guantanamo Bay

Lord Oakeshott of Seagrove Bay: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What was the response of Colin Powell to the issues raised with him by the Foreign Secretary on 23 January in relation to the British detainees held by the United States at Guantanamo Bay.

Baroness Amos: My right honourable friend the Foreign Secretary's exchange with Colin Powell on 23 January formed part of the continuing dialogue between the Government and the United States Government on the welfare and position of the UK detainees in Guantanamo Bay. We continue to press the US to make decisions on the future of the detainees. bjc

Russia

Lord Lamont of Lerwick: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they have raised with the Russian Government the closure of TV6 and ORT television stations.

Baroness Amos: The EU released a statement in February 2002 about the case of TV6, stressing the importance of independent media. The UK also raised this during bilateral human rights talks with the Russians in September 2002.
	ORT has not been closed: it continues to broadcast under its new name First Channel.

Russia

Lord Lamont of Lerwick: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether President Putin has now raised any matters concerning Boris Berezovsky with the United Kingdom Government.

Baroness Amos: No. lynne

Russia

Lord Lamont of Lerwick: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	On how many occasions they have made representations to the Russian Government about the freedom of the press and other media in Russia.

Baroness Amos: The Foreign and Commonwealth Office raises media freedom regularly with the Russian Government both bilaterally and through the EU (which made a statement on media freedom in Russia in July last year). During our bilateral human rights talks with the Russians in September 2002 and March 2003, we raised our concerns over the closure of Russian TV channels, radio stations and newspapers as well as the continued harassment of journalists, particularly those reporting on Chechnya and those from Russia's regions. In addition, we regularly lobby on individual cases including through the FCO Freedom of Expression Panel, via EU demarches (e.g. on Grigory Pasko in Sept 2002), and during our bilateral talks (e.g. on Valentin Danilov and Igor Sutyagin in March 2003). DfID, in conjunction with the FCO, runs a number of in-country programmes aimed at developing an independent media.

Nigeria

Baroness Cox: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they are providing any assistance to enable Nigeria to implement procedures to ensure free and fair elections.

Baroness Amos: The British Government have been closely involved in the election process throughout, providing extensive assistance to both the Independent National Electoral Commission and to civil society organisations. Assistance has been in such different areas as information dissemination to the public, training the media in election reporting, production of guidelines and training programmes for domestic monitors and international observers, advising on codes of practice for police conduct during elections and guidance to political parties in resolving disputes through the process of law.
	In collaboration with other donors, we have supported the Commonwealth International Observation Group and training programmes for election officials. Rebo

Zimbabwe: Arms Embargo

Baroness Wilkins: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether any goods subject to the EU arms embargo have recently been approved for export to Zimbabwe.

Baroness Amos: The Government have approved the export to Zimbabwe of a Travelling Wave Tube (TWT) which has been repaired in the UK. A TWT is radar equipment used for air traffic control.
	The export licence was initially rejected because the TWT appeared on the military list. Its export would therefore have contravened the EU arms embargo on Zimbabwe.
	The TWT has since been modified so that it is no longer suitable for military use. As a result, DTI Technologies Unit re-rated the TWT making it now a dual use good.
	The decision to overturn the original rejection was made after discussion with export control section of Defence Intelligence Service. They have established that the equipment is for use at Bulawayo and Harare airports. There is no Zimbabwe air force facility at Bulawayo. There is one near the civil airport in Harare, but the military have their own radar. We are therefore satisfied that the TWT is for civilian use only.
	This decision underlines our policy that targeted sanctions imposed on Zimbabwe should not affect the lives of ordinary people unconnected with the Mugabe regime.

Democratic Republic of Congo: Exploitation of Natural Resources

The Earl of Sandwich: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When and how they will respond to the latest report of the United Nations panel of experts on the exploitation of natural resources in the Democratic Republic of Congo.

Baroness Amos: The UK supported Resolution 1457 (2003) which reiterates the UN Security Council's commitment to take appropriate action to help put an end to the plundering of the resources of the DRC. The report did not, however, contain sufficient information to substantiate the assertion made in it that the UK companies named had not complied with OECD guidelines. We have again asked the chairman of the Panel of Experts for this information (most recently on 11 March) and once it has been provided, we will respond to the report in more detail. bjc

Russia: Violence Against Women

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will raise the subject of violence against women, including domestic violence, at the next Russo-British human rights meeting.

Baroness Amos: The Foreign and Commonwealth Office discussed the issue of violence against women during bilateral talks with the Russian Government in September 2002. It is likely to be raised at the next talks, due in the first quarter of 2004, although the date of these talks has not yet been set.
	We will also continue to raise the issue of violence against women with the Russian Government in other bilateral and multilateral fora.
	In addition, Her Majesty's Government have supported projects in this area, including emergency social and legal assistance to help women; monitoring women's rights through a network of women's NGOs; publicising women's issues through theatre; strengthening the Russian association of crisis centres for women and training volunteers to work in these centres.

Thailand: Unresolved Killings

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they are discussing with the government of Thailand the recent increase in unresolved killings, the extent to which these may be linked to illegal exports of methamphetamines from Burma and the progress of the Thai investigation into summary killing.

Baroness Amos: Our ambassador in Bangkok has raised with the Thai Government our concerns about the dramatic increase in drugs-related deaths in Thailand since the start of the Thai "Campaign against Drugs" on 1 February. Our EU partners share these concerns. We are urging the Thai Government to adopt measures to prevent the death toll rising further and to proceed with independent investigations into each death. The Royal Thai Government have set up two official committees to investigate the deaths, many of which may be related to the drug trade. Our embassy in Bangkok regularly discusses drugs-related issues with the Thai Government and has provided some drugs-related project support. Joan

Iraq: Protection of Cultural Property

Lord Renfrew of Kaimsthorn: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Bach on 26 March (WA 81), whether they have issued any guidance for military and other personnel as to specific archaeological sites and museums in Iraq which particularly need protection in the present conflict; and whether they have drawn upon the expertise of British specialists in the history and archaeology of Iraq in compiling such guidance.

Lord Bach: United Kingdom forces have been issued with guidance which reflects paragraph 53 of Additional Protocol 1 of the Geneva Conventions.
	We have taken advice from a wide range of sources in drawing up a list of cultural property inside Iraq. Unless such property is used to support military effort, coalition forces will not attack historical, archaeological and cultural heritage sites.
	In addition, coalition forces are taking every precaution to respect and avoid damage to holy sites.

Iraq: Guidance to Civil Servants and Service Personnel

Lord Lester of Herne Hill: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Bach on 3 April (WA 148), whether they will publish the guidance given to civil servants and members of the Armed Forces relating to duties imposed upon them by international and United Kingdom humanitarian and civil law in the conduct of military action in Iraq; and
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Bach on 3 April (WA 148), whether a manual of military law or other similar publication is distributed to members of the Armed Forces containing guidance about the duties imposed upon them by international and United Kingdom humanitarian and civil law; and, if so, whether they will make the publication available to the public.

Lord Bach: We do not issue a manual of military law to members of the Armed Forces, although legal advisers are embedded within the chain of command for operations. The Civil Service Code is available on the Cabinet Office website (www.cabinet-office.gov.uk). I refer the Noble Lord to the answer I gave on 3 April (Official Report, column WA 148). The Rules of Engagement under which British Armed Forces in Iraq operate fully reflect our obligations under the law of armed conflict to ensure minimum use of force to achieve military objectives. It would be inappropriate to publish the rules of engagement, since to do so could jeopardise operations. I am therefore withholding that information under Exemption 1 (Defence, security and international relations) of the Code of Practice on Access to Government Information.

Iraq: Surrender of Weapons

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What arrangements are being made in Iraq for the surrender and destruction of weapons of all kinds still held by civilians and ex-military personnel in all areas controlled by allied forces; and whether they consider it reasonable that distribution of free food be made conditional on the giving up of arms.

Lord Bach: United Kingdom forces have destroyed some caches of weaponry discarded by the Iraqi military. A more systematic process of disarmament, both of civilians and of ex-military personnel, will be a matter for a new Iraqi government, drawing on the expertise of the international community and organisations such as the UN.
	Where it is safe for them to do so, UK forces are distributing humanitarian aid to the people of Iraq. This will continue until the security situation stabilises sufficiently for the full deployment of civilian aid agencies. Distribution of aid is conducted on the basis of need, not of disarmament.

Army Trained Strength

Baroness Ramsay of Cartvale: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What was the Army trained strength from April 2001 to February 2003.

Lord Bach: A computing coding error has been identified in Army strength figures prepared by the Defence Analytical Services Agency (DASA) since 1 April 2001. From that date a number of untrained soldiers have been recorded against the trained Army strength. As a result Army strength figures previously announced and included in DASA publications have overstated the trained strength of the Army during that period. However, the combined strength of trained and untrained personnel has been correctly reported in all publications. It is the breakdown between trained and untrained strength that is affected by this problem.
	As at 1 February 2003, whole Army strength (comprising UK Trained Army Personnel, Gurkhas and Full Time Reserve Service) stood at 101,750. Army recruitment and retention initiatives are producing gains to whole Army strength in line with forecasts. The trend over the past 12 months has been encouraging with Army strength increasing by over 1,300 trained personnel. A table comparing the figures issued in error with the corrected figures follows: lynne
	
		Whole Army Strength (April 2001–February 2003)Previously Published and Corrected Figures
		
			   Published Figures Corrected Figures 
			 1 April 2001 UKTAP 96,285 96,280 
			  GURKHAS 3,447 3,450 
			  FTRS 646 650 
			  Total 100,380 100,380 
			 1 May 2001 UKTAP 96,083 96,060 
			  GURKHAS 3,455 3,450 
			  FTRS 674 670 
			  Total 100,210 100,180 
			 1 June 2001 UKTAP 96,003 95,980 
			  GURKHAS 3,471 3,470 
			  FTRS 695 700 
			  Total 100,170 100,140 
			 1 July 2001 UKTAP 95,864 95,820 
			  GURKHAS 3,485 3,480 
			  FTRS 695 700 
			  Total 100,040 100,000 
			 1 August 2001 UKTAP 95,863 95,780 
			  GURKHAS 3,500 3,500 
			  FTRS 709 710 
			  Total 100,070 99,980 
			 1 September 2001 UKTAP 96,049 95,920 
			  GURKHAS 3,500 3,500 
			  FTRS 755 760 
			  Total 100,300 100,170 
			  
			 1 October 2001 UKTAP 96,261 95,970 
			  GURKHAS 3,528 3,530 
			  FTRS 812 810 
			  Total 100,600 100,310 
			 1 November 2001 UKTAP 96,255 95,900 
			  GURKHAS 3,526 3,530 
			  FTRS 854 850 
			  Total 100,640 100,280 
			 1 December 2001 UKTAP 96,320 96,000 
			  GURKHAS 3,583 3,580 
			  FTRS 901 900 
			  Total 100,800 100,490 
			 1 January 2002 UKTAP 96,373 96,040 
			  GURKHAS 3,622 3,620 
			  FTRS 919 920 
			  Total 100,910 100,580 
			 1 February 2002 UKTAP 96,449 95,980 
			  GURKHAS 3,536 3,540 
			  FTRS 914 910 
			  Total 100,900 100,430 
			 1 March 2002 UKTAP 96,428 95,980 
			  GURKHAS 3,458 3,460 
			  FTRS 919 920 
			  Total 100,810 100,360 
			 1 April 2002 UKTAP 96,507 96,020 
			  GURKHAS 3,449 3,450 
			  FTRS 946 950 
			  Total 100,900 100,420 
			 1 May 2002 UKTAP 96,880 96,330 
			  GURKHAS 3,460 3,460 
			  FTRS 984 980 
			  Total 101,320 100,770 
			 1 June 2002 UKTAP 97,050 96,430 
			  GURKHAS 3,470 3,470 
			  FTRS 988 990 
			  Total 101,510 100,890 
			 1 July 2002 UKTAP 97,090 96,500 
			  GURKHAS 3,470 3,470 
			  FTRS 981 980 
			  Total 101,540 100,960 
			 1 August 2002 UKTAP 96,970 96,360 
			  GURKHAS 3,480 3,470 
			  FTRS 1,030 1,030 
			  Total 101,480 100,860 
			 1 September 2002 UKTAP 97,160 96,590 
			  GURKHAS 3,460 3,460 
			  FTRS 1,043 1,040 
			  Total 101,660 101,100 
			 1 October 2002 UKTAP 97,480 96,780 
			  GURKHAS 3,460 3,460 
			  FTRS 1,054 1,050 
			  Total 101,990 101,290 
			 1 November 2002 UKTAP 97,540 96,880 
			  GURKHAS 3,480 3,480 
			  FTRS 1,054 1,060 
			  Total 102,070 101,420 
			 1 December 2002 UKTAP 97,630 96,840 
			  GURKHAS 3,500 3,500 
			  FTRS 1,082 1,080 
			  Total 102,220 101,420 
			  
			 1 January 2003 UKTAP 98,180 97,200 
			  GURKHAS 3,520 3,520 
			  FTRS 1,105 1,110 
			  Total 102,800 101,820 
			 1 February 2003 UKTAP  97,220 
			  GURKHAS  3,430 
			  FTRS  1,100 
			  Total  101,750 
		
	
	Rounding to the nearest 10 introduced in May 2002. Due to the rounding methods used totals may not always equal the sum of the parts.

Middle East

The Earl of Sandwich: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When they expect the road map for the Middle East peace settlement to be published; and when were the last exchanges with the United States Government to expedite the process.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: The Quartet road map will be published once a new Palestinian Cabinet has been approved by the Palestinian Legislative Committee. We expect this to happen shortly.
	My right honourable friends the Prime Minister and Foreign Secretary as well as FCO Ministers and officials frequently discuss the roadmap with US colleagues. The Prime Minister and President Bush discussed the road map at Hillsborough on 8 April.The Foreign Secretary also met Secretary of State Powell on the same day.

Iraq: Support for Coalition

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Which countries support in some form, whether political or military, the coalition currently engaged in war with Iraq.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: It is for the individual countries concerned to decide if they wish to declare publicly the nature of their involvement.

Iraq: Support for Coalition

Lord Hoyle: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What is Italy's contribution to the allied coalition in the Iraq conflict.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: It is for the individual countries concerned to decide if they wish to declare publicly the nature of their involvement. lynne

Gibraltar

Lord Hoyle: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether any discussions have recently taken place between Her Majesty's Government and the Spanish Government about the status of Gibraltar.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: There are frequent discussions between the Government and the Government of Spain on a range of EU and other foreign policy issues. As my right honourable friend the Prime Minister made clear in another place on 27 March (Official Report, Col. 309W), since 1 January there has been no discussion of the issue of sovereignty over Gibraltar.

Gibraltar

Lord Hoyle: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether any promise has been made to Spain in connection with Gibraltar in return for Spain's support of the American-British position on Iraq.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: No.

Gibraltar

Lord Hoyle: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What are their plans to celebrate 300 years of British history in Gibraltar; and whether they have received any request from the Gibraltarians for general assistance on this matter.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: As my right honourable friend the Minister for Europe answered in another place on 12 March (Official Report, Col 291W), the Government of Gibraltar have established a 2004 Tercentenary Committee. We shall consider carefully the question of UK government participation in commemorative events. There have been informal exchanges between Foreign Office officials and the Gibraltar Government on this matter, but we have received no request for general assistance. Rebo

UK and US: Treaties and Agreements

Lord Lester of Herne Hill: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether there are any treaties or international agreements between the United Kingdom and the United States whose contents have not been made public; and, if so, whether they will identify the relevant treaties or agreements and give their reasons for not disclosing their contents.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: All internationally legally binding treaties and agreements concluded by the UK with the US (and those concluded by the UK with any other States) are published and registered with the UN Secretary-General. This practice will equally apply to treaties which have been recently concluded and for which publication and registration is therefore pending. There are other forms of agreement where there is no obligation for the UK to either publish or register with the UN Secretary-General. Many of these will be in the public domain. The information needed to compile a list of these is not held centrally and can be provided only at disproportionate cost.

Iraq: Possibility of Terrorist Repercussions

Lord Avebury: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they agree with President Hosni Mubarak that the war in Iraq will create "100 Bin Ladens".

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: The Prime Minister stated in another place on 2 April 2003 that he takes anything that President Mubarak says extremely seriously. Her Majesty's Government believe that the question of how the conflict in Iraq turns out in the Arab and Muslim world will be dependent on what happens once this conflict is won. If people can see that the Iraqi people are given freedom, the ability to have a proper representative government and protection on human rights and are able to enjoy their prosperity, we believe that across the Arab and Muslim world the message will be positive.

Boris Berezovsky

Lord Lamont of Lerwick: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Why the Home Office took so long to consider the application for asylum of Boris Berezovsky.

Lord Filkin: It is the general policy of the Home Office not to disclose any information it may hold on an individual or their immigration status to third parties. Joan

Boris Berezovsky

Lord Lamont of Lerwick: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Why Mr Boris Berezovsky has been refused political asylum in this country.

Lord Filkin: It is the general policy of the Home Office not to disclose any information it may hold on an individual or their immigration status to third parties.

Passports

Lord Marlesford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Filkin on 4 April (WA 155–56), in what circumstances a United Kingdom passport is reported as "unavailable"; whether they have now instructed the appropriate Government authorities to distinguish in their records between passports reported lost, stolen and unavailable; and when they expect to be able to provide a numerical breakdown between these three categories.

Lord Filkin: A United Kingdom passport is recorded as unavailable when it is not in the possession of the rightful bearer but has been neither lost nor stolen. One example of this would be when the passport has been submitted to a third party to assist in confirming identity and the bearer has an urgent travel requirement.
	Through developments in the passport issuing system it will shortly be possible to provide figures which distinguish between passports recorded as having been stolen and those recorded as lost or unavailable. These figures will go back to November 2001 when the implementation of the current passport issuing system was completed.
	As part of its fraud action plan the UK Passport Service is developing a comprehensive system for reporting, recording and disseminating information relating to passports which have been lost, stolen or recovered. This system will be operational by the end of this year and will be extended to UK passport issuing posts abroad and to the United Kingdom Immigration Service. This system will enable a number of reports to be produced including those that distinguish between passports recorded as having been lost and stolen. The new system will not include the category "unavailable". lynne

Passports

Lord Marlesford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What charges are levied on those who report their passports lost, stolen or unavailable; and what proportion of the cost to public funds of such missing passports is recovered from such charges.

Lord Filkin: There is no charge levied by the United Kingdom Passport Service on people who report their passports lost, stolen or unavailable other than the fee required to replace the passport. The Passport Service operates on a net running cost regime and all its costs are recovered through passport fees.

Passports

Lord Marlesford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether the records they keep of United Kingdom passports reported lost, stolen or unavailable enable them to identify passport holders who make such reports more than once.

Lord Filkin: Yes, the records held by the United Kingdom Passport Service make it possible to establish when an individual has reported their passport as being lost, stolen or unavailable on more than one occasion.

Passports

Lord Marlesford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many of the United Kingdom passports reported lost, stolen or unavailable in each of the past five years have subsequently been recovered.

Lord Filkin: The United Kingdom Passport Service does not routinely collate figures for passports which are reported lost, stolen or unavailable on more than one occasion and such figures for each of the last five years are not therefore available.

Asylum Applicants

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many asylum applicants are accommodated in a centre at Dungavel, Lanarkshire, and how many children are of school-age; whether this is a former prison; whether the residents are allowed out by day; what provision is made for the children's education, and whether this will be improved

Lord Filkin: Dungavel House in Lanarkshire is an immigration removal centre for the detention of individuals held under the Immigration Acts. The facility, formerly HMP Dungavel, was acquired from the Scottish Prison Service in February 2001 and as an immigration detention centre in November of that year. By definition, individuals detained there are held in custody and may not leave the centre.
	As at 28 December 2002, the date of the most recent published statistics available, there were 80 individuals recorded as detained at Dungavel, of whom 55 were recorded as having sought asylum at some stage. Those figures are not broken down by age. However, a one-off exercise on 2 April 2003 recorded that there were 21 children detained at Dungavel, of whom 15 were of school age, ie aged 5-16 years.
	A programme of individually tailored education, developed with advice from the local education authority, is available to all school age children of family groups detained at Dungavel. The Scottish national curriculum provides the framework on which the education programme is based and it includes classes in subjects such as English, maths, science, food technology and history. Classes in music and art are also provided. We are satisfied that the education programme is sufficient to meet the needs of a constantly changing number of children of variable ages and abilities, most of whom will remain at Dungavel only for a very short period. Rebo

Asylum Applicants

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What are the latest figures for the number of asylum applicants held in detention in England and Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland; and, in each case, how many were held without charge in Her Majesty's prisons.

Lord Filkin: The latest available data on the number of persons detained solely under Immigration Act powers relate to 28 December 2002. As at that date 1,145 people were in detention, 795 of whom were recorded as having sought asylum at some stage. The number of those held in England, Scotland and Northern Ireland and in Prison Service establishments therein are given in the table. At this date there were no asylum seekers recorded as being in detention in Wales.
	
		Persons recorded as being in detention solely under Immigration Act Powers as at 28 December 2002, by country of detention 1 .
		
			  All asylum seekers(2) Of whom, in Prison Service Establishments 
			 England 735 105 
			 Scotland 55 * 
			 Northern Ireland 5 5 
			 Total 795 110 
		
	
	(1) Figures rounded to nearest five. With * denoting 1 or 2, and excludes persons in dual detention.
	(2) Persons detained solely under Immigration Act powers who are recorded as having sought asylum at some stage.
	The routine use of Prison Service accommodation for immigration detaineees ended at the beginning of 2002, but it remains necessary to hold small numbers of detainees in prison for reasons of control and security. The figure of 110 may also include individuals who are held pending deportation after completion of custodial sentences.
	Information on Immigration Act detainees as at
	29 March 2003 will be published on 30 May 2003 on
	the Home Office Research, Development
	and Statistics Directorate web-site at http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds./immigration1.html.

Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act: Section 55 Decisions

Earl Russell: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Filkin on 3 April (WA 145), whether, if individuals present further information which they wish to be considered in relation to a decision under Section 55 of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002, the Home Secretary has the authority to grant support in response to these additional circumstances; and, if so, how many times this power has been exercised.

Lord Filkin: Once a decision to refuse the National Asylum Support Service (NASS) support under Section 55 of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 has been made, there is no legal barrier to the Home Secretary considering further evidence and, if appropriate, reaching a new decision to grant support.
	Subject to quality assurance of the data, it is planned to publish information on the operation of Section 55 within the quarterly asylum statistics at the end of May. lynne

Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act: Section 55 Decisions

Baroness Lockwood: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether the Court of Appeal judgment on Section 55 of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 affects the operation of it of that Act.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: Section 55 of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002, which came into force on 8 January 2003, prevents the provision of support to asylum seekers unless the Secretary of State is satisfied that their asylum claim was made as soon as reasonably practicable after arrival in the United Kingdom. Exceptions include families with children and those who can show they would suffer treatment contrary to the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). Those with care needs continue to be supported by local authorities under the National Assistance Act 1948.
	On 19 February, Mr Justice Collins gave judgment in six test cases. He found that the Section 55 decision-making process was flawed, largely on the grounds that there had initially been insufficient investigation of the circumstances in which entry to the United Kingdom was achieved, to give the claimant the opportunity to rebut a suggestion of incredibility and to set out fully the reasons for decisions. He also decided that there will normally be a real risk that to leave someone destitute will violate Articles 3 and 8.1 of the ECHR, and that inquiries should be made to try to establish whether any support is likely to exist. This effectively shifted the burden of proof to the Secretary of State, rather than the asylum applicant, as Section 55 had originally intended.
	The Home Secretary appealed against the decision of Mr Justice Collins and the Court of Appeal gave judgment on 18 March 2003. The Attorney General made it clear that the appeal was being made on the basis of the key legal principles, not on the basis of the six individual cases.
	At the Court of Appeal, the appeal was dismissed, as expected, in relation to the six cases, the judgment found in favour of the Government on several key issues of legal principle:
	The court's decision makes it clear that the burden of showing an asylum claim was made as soon as reasonably practicable is on the asylum seeker, the ECHR does not require state support to be given automatically to all destitute asylum seekers who have failed to make their asylum claims when required to do so, and Section 55 is not incompatible with the ECHR in any respect.
	The court found against the Government on procedural fairness and drew attention to a number of areas where they considered improvements could be made.
	The Home Office has already changed the procedures for making Section 55 decisions to meet the court's main concerns.
	The Government will not appeal to the House of Lords against the Court of Appeal decision.
	The Court of Appeal judgment means that the Government can continue to operate Section 55 as Parliament intended. It gives renewed legal backing for the Government's policy to tackle abuse of the asylum system and send a clear message to those who are abusing the system that they will not be supported at public expense.
	The key legal issues have been settled by the Court of Appeal and the Government can, therefore, uphold the robust and and fair asylum support system for which Parliament legislated.

Sex Offender Treatment Programmes:HM Prison Albany

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they have paid compensation to prison officers from HM Prison Albany, or other prisons, in consequence of their taking part in the Sex Offenders Training Programmes; if so, in how many cases; and how much compensation was paid.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: Her Majesty's Prison Service has paid a total of £325,000 in compensation to three former prison officer tutors, all from Albany prison, in respect of their personal injury claims for damages suffered from taking part in Sex Offender Treatment Programmes.

Heavy Goods Vehicles: Weight Limits

Lord Bradshaw: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many prosecutions there have been, in the last year for which figures are available, of heavy goods vehicles for contravening the weight limits on suitably signed roads.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: The Home Office Court proceedings database for England and Wales does not separately identify the offence of exceeding the weight limit on a specified road from other summary motoring load offences.
	Information relating to Northern Ireland is a matter for my right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland.
	Matters related to Scotland are for the Scottish Executive.

FirstGroup plc

Lord Phillips of Sudbury: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	At which meeting of the board of the Strategic Rail Authority was the decision taken to exclude FirstGroup plc from the shortlist for the competition for the new East Anglian rail franchise.

Lord Macdonald of Tradeston: Decisions as to which potential bidders should be shortlisted to receive an invitation to tender (ITT) are not matters reserved to the SRA board, but are taken by the SRA executive committee. The shortlist of those to receive ITTs for the Greater Anglia franchise was decided in confidence at a meeting of the executive committee on 13 March and announced on 1 April.

Rail Passenger Franchises

Lord Berkeley: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What criteria the Strategic Rail Authority uses in assessing which companies are (a) pre-qualified, (b) shortlisted and (c) final choices in the bidding process for rail passenger franchises.

Lord Macdonald of Tradeston: The Strategic Rail Authority uses a variety of criteria for assessing which companies progress through the process to the award of a franchise. These are all aimed at encouraging strong competition leading to the selection of a value for money bidder. The criteria for each competition are set out in the bid documentation sent to all bidders.

Rail Passenger Franchises

Lord Berkeley: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they believe that the Strategic Rail Authority has guidelines on the maximum number of franchises that any company can operate or be shortlisted for.

Lord Macdonald of Tradeston: The Strategic Rail Authority has no such guidance.

High Speed North-South Passenger Line

Lord Berkeley: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How much money the Strategic Rail Authority expects to spend on research and development work on a proposed high speed north-south passenger line during the financial year 2003–04.

Lord Macdonald of Tradeston: The Strategic Rail Authority has allocated a budget of £300,000 for the year 2003–04. This will be used among other things to conduct a consultation exercise and to carry out further demand and financial modelling work.

Rail Levy

Lord Berkeley: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will list the names of organisations which responded to the Health and Safety Executive's consultation on a levy charge for railway safety activities, which closed in December 2002.

Lord Macdonald of Tradeston: The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) conducted a consultation exercise on the principle of a rail levy between 29 November and 20 December 2002. The Health and Safety Commission (HSC) discussed a paper outlining the results of the consultation, including details of those who responded, at a meeting on 14 January 2003. A copy of this paper has been placed in the House of Lords Library.

Gypsies

Lord Avebury: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How much of the £22 billion to be spent on "driving forward thinking and sustainable communities", announced by the Deputy Prime Minister on 5 February, is to be spent on accommodation or facilities for gypsies.

Lord Rooker: The £22 billion government package to drive forward thriving and sustainable communities will provide more affordable housing across England. This investment will include homes for key workers, modern built housing, and to improve social housing in deprived areas. However gypsy and traveller sites will not be funded through this mechanism.
	On 27 March 2003, my honourable friend the Member for Harrow East announced at the Local Government Association conference that further funding of £16 million will be made available over the next two years from the gypsy sites refurbishment grant to improve and upgrade existing sites, and to establish temporary sites and emergency stopping places.

Disabled Facilities Grant

Lord Avebury: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What representations they have received about the provisions of the Regulatory Reform (Housing Assistance) (England and Wales) Order, S.I. 2002/1860, which comes into effect on 18 July 2003; whether they have concluded that primary legislation will be necessary to ensure that the administration of the disabled facilities grant is not racially discriminating; and, if so, whether they will enter into discussions with opposition parties with a view to getting a one-clause bill for this purpose through all its stages in one day.

Lord Rooker: The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister has received representations, including from the noble Lord, about the provisions of the Regulatory Reform (Housing Assistance) (England and Wales) Order 2002 which extend eligibility for Disabled Facilities Grant (DFG) to occupiers of qualifying park homes. We want to ensure that there is no risk that the administration of DFG discriminates unlawfully on racial grounds. Primary legislation would be necessary to amend these provisions, and we are considering the options available to us.

Planning Policy:Town Centres and Retail Developments

Lord Burlison: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they are able to clarify their planning policies for town centres and retail developments.

Lord Rooker: The Government's planning policy on town centres is set out in: Planning Policy Guidance Note 6 (PPG6): Town Centres and Retail Developments (June 1996); that parliamentary Answers given by the then planning Ministers, Nick Raynsford on 5 December 1997 and Richard Caborn on 11 February 1999 (the Caborn statement), together with Mr Caborn's contribution to a debate in the House of Commons on 11 March 1999; the Government responses to Select Committees in July 1997 and May 2000; PPG11: Regional Planning (October 2000); and PPG13: Transport (March 2001).
	The policy has operated successfully since 1996 but there is increasing evidence of differences in interpretation. This statement sets out the policy and how the First Secretary of State intends to operate it when determining planning applications and appeals. He expects local planning authorities to apply the same policy when determining planning applicants. Policy Tests
	The purpose of the policy is to sustain and enhance the vitality and viability of town and other existing centres by focusing retail, leisure and other key town centre uses which attract a lot of people within those centres. PPG6 emphasises the plan-led approach to promoting development in town centres, both through plan policies and the identification of locations and sites for development. It sets out a number of tests that must be satisfied if applications to develop retail or leisure facilities are to be successful. The Caborn statement further clarified the application of the test of need and the sequential approach as applying to proposals to develop at edge of centre or out of centre locations which are not in accordance with an up to date development plan strategy that is itself consistent with PPG6.
	In summary, applicants must: demonstrate that there is a need for the development; having established that such a need exists, adopt a sequential approach to site selection; consider the impact on nearby centres; and provide evidence on the site's accessibility by a choice of means of transport, as demonstrated by a transport assessment (see PPG13), the likely changes in travel patterns over the relevant catchment area, and any significant environmental impacts. All these tests apply equally to proposals for extensions as well as to new developments. Need
	Proposals which would be located at an edge of centre or out of centre location and which are not in accordance with an up to date development plan strategy, or are in accordance with the development plan but that plan is out of date, is inconsistent with national planning policy guidance, or otherwise fails to establish adequately the need for new retail and leisure development and other development to which PPG6 applies, should be required to demonstrate both a retail need for additional facilities and that a sequential approach has been applied in selecting the location for the site.
	Some applicants have sought to make a distinction between quantitative and qualitative need for new retail facilities. PPG6 does not make this distinction although evidence on both has frequently been presented at planning inquiries. The First Secretary of State accepts that need can be expressed in quantitative and qualitative terms but considers that evidence presented on need is becoming increasingly and unnecessarily complicated. He therefore places greater weight on quantitative need for new retail provision to be defined in terms of additional floorspace for the types of retail development distinguished in PPG6, which are comparison and convenience shopping. Where both comparison and convenience goods are proposed to be sold within the same development, the First Secretary of State will expect to have evidence on the need for each type of goods.
	Regeneration has also been argued to be a component of the need for additional retail floorspace. There is no government guidance that supports this interpretation. The First Secretary of State considers that the contribution that a proposed development might make to the regeneration of a site or its area could be a material consideration to be taken into account in determining an application, but does not consider it to be an aspect of retail need.
	Equally, the net additional employment created by a proposed development is not an indicator of retail need but may be a material consideration.
	For the avoidance of doubt, the First Secretary of State does not regard regeneration or employment creation as aspects of retail need for the purposes of the tests set out in PPG6 and the Caborn statement.
	The principles outlined above apply also to leisure uses. Sequential Approach
	PPG6 seeks to promote sustainable development by locating major generators of travel in existing centres, where access by a choice of means of transport, not only by car, is easy and convenient.
	PPG6 requires a sequential approach to be adopted in selecting sites for new development. Both local planning authorities and developers should be able to demonstrate that all town centre options have been thoroughly assessed before less central sites are considered for development for key town centre uses. This means that the first preference should be for town centre sites, followed by edge of centre sites and only then out of centre sites in locations that are accessible by a choice of means of transport.
	In providing evidence that they have complied with this guidance, applicants must demonstrate flexibility and realism in terms of the format, design and scale of their development, and the amount of car parking, tailoring these to fit local circumstances.
	The First Secretary of State will follow the approach set out in the Government's response to the Environment Select Committee in 2000. Where a class of goods is capable of being sold from a town centre location, that is the preferred location for the retail development and he will expect to see flexibility in the scale and format of a proposed development to meet that objective. A retailing format that can only be provided at an out of town location is not regarded as meeting the requirements of this policy.
	The First Secretary of State does not consider that developers and retailers always take sufficient account of this element of planning policy and further considers that this is potentially undermining the Government's objectives for town centres and its policies to achieve development that makes efficient and sustainable use of land and reduces social exclusion. He will look for evidence of, for example, more efficient design and layout, greater use of multi-storey developments, more efficient car parking provision, mixed-use development and opportunities for home delivery services. Where development consists of defined elements, such as a retail warehouse park or a grouping of retail or leisure uses, the First Secretary of State expects developers and retailers to consider the degree to which constituent parts of the development could be accommodated on more central sites.
	In applying the sequential approach, the relevant centres in which to search for sites will depend on the nature and scale of the proposed development and the catchment that the development seeks to serve, as set out in the Caborn statement. The scale of such proposals should also be appropriately related to the centre and catchment that the development seeks to serve. The First Secretary of State therefore wishes to make it clear that development that would serve a wide catchment should be located in a centre that serves a similar catchment area. Bulky Goods
	PPG6 recognises that some types of retailing, such as large stores selling bulky goods, may not be able to find suitable sites either in or on the edge of town centres. The First Secretary of State considers that it rests with developers and retailers to demonstrate that a majority of their goods cannot be sold from town centre stores. He does not consider that developments involving the sale of bulky goods are exempted from meeting the policy tests in PPG6 and subsequent clarifications. Revised PPG6
	The First Secretary of State will be issuing revised planning policy guidance for town centres and retail developments for consultation in due course.

NHS: Patient Charges

Lord Lipsey: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How much revenue they raise from patient charges for—
	(a) National Health Service prescriptions;
	(b) National Health Service dental treatment;
	(c) National Health Service sight tests; and
	(d) National Health Service wigs and fabric supports;
	and what percentage of total National Health Service expenditure the combined figure represents.

Baroness Andrews: The figure for National Health Service prescription income in the Department of Health resource accounts for 2001–02 is £413.1 million.
	The figure for NHS dental income in the DH resource accounts for 2001–02 is £472.1 million. However it should be noted that this figure is gross of around £1.6 million of patient refunds (this figure is not separately identified in the accounts).
	There is no patient charge income from sight tests. NHS sight tests are free to certain priority groups, mainly people aged 60 and over, children, people on low incomes and defined categories of people at risk of developing eye disease. Sight tests that take place in hospitals are free of charge to all patients.
	Income from wigs and fabric supports are retained by NHS trusts and are not recorded separately.
	NHS expenditure in 2001–02 was £49,406 million hence the figures combined above represent 1.8 per cent of the total NHS expenditure.

Nurses

Baroness Cox: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How, given that the rights and responsibilities of the Chief Nursing Officer and those of nurses at regional level have been restricted, they will ensure effective leadership of nurses and nursing in the provision of healthcare.

Baroness Andrews: The Chief Nursing Officer and her team will continue to exercise strong policy and professional leadership through well established networks with nurse leaders in Strategic Health Authorities, National Health Service Trusts, Primary Care Trusts, professional associations and organisations, and in independent and voluntary sector healthcare providers.
	In the new departmental structure the Chief Nursing Officer will remain accountable to the Chief Executive, have a place on the two main boards—the Department of Health Management Board and the Health and Social Care Delivery Board—and play a key role as Director of Patient Experience.

Nurses

Baroness Cox: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How they will ensure that an executive nurse is on every foundation trust board.

Baroness Andrews: Subject to parliamentary approval, the Health and Social Care (Community Health and Standards) Bill will provide for applicants for National Health Service Foundation Trust status to determine the detail of their constitutional arrangements within the parameters set out in Schedule 1. It will be for each applicant to decide whether to include an executive nurse on the board of directors taking account of its local circumstances and any responses to consultation on the proposals set out in its application.

Cancer Plan

Baroness Hayman: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When they expect the results of the special tracking exercise undertaken in respect of strategic health authorities use of funds allocated under the Cancer Plan to be made publicly available.

Baroness Andrews: We intend to publish headline national and cancer network level figures on cancer investment on the Department of Health's website in late spring. lynne

NHS Trusts: Finances

Baroness Noakes: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will name the five National Health Service trusts that exceeded their external financing limits by more than £10,000, as referred to in paragraph 4.23 of the Comptroller and Auditor General's report on the National Health Service summarised accounts 2001–02 (HC 493).

Baroness Andrews: The five National Health Service trusts that exceeded their external finance limit by more than the £10,000 de minimis limit are:
	Bedfordshire & Luton Community NHS Trust
	Gloucestershire Ambulance NHS Trust
	North Essex Mental Health Partnership NHS Trust
	Northern Devon Healthcare NHS Trust
	Worthing Priority Care Services NHS Trust

NHS Trusts: Finances

Baroness Noakes: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Which 28 National Health Service trusts significantly underachieved their financial management targets for the purposes of the star ratings as referred to in paragraph 4.29 of the Comptroller and Auditor General's report of the National Heath Service summarised accounts 2001–02 (HC493).

Baroness Andrews: This information requested is in the following table. National Health Service trusts rated as significantly underachieved against financial management target in 2001–02. Ashford and St Peter's Hospitals NHS Trust Avon and Wiltshire Mental Health Partnership NHS Trust Bedford Hospitals NHS Trust Bedfordshire and Luton Community NHS Trust Bromley Hospitals NHS Trust Cornwall Healthcare NHS Trust Dartford and Gravesham NHS Trust East and North Hertfordshire NHS Trust Eastbourne Hospitals NHS Trust Maidstone and Tunbridge Wells NHS Trust Mid Sussex NHS Trust Plymouth Hospitals NHS Trust Portsmouth Health Care NHS Trust Princess Royal Hospital NHS Trust Royal Cornwall Hospitals NHS Trust Royal United Hospital Bath NHS Trust Royal West Sussex NHS Trust Somerset Partnership NHS and Social Care Trust South Devon Health Care NHS Trust South Warwickshire Combined Care NHS Trust South Warwickshire General Hospitals NHS Trust Sussex Weald and Downs NHS Trust United Bristol Healthcare NHS Trust University Hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire NHS Trust West Hertfordshire Hospitals NHS Trust West Suffolk Hospitals NHS Trust Weston Area Health NHS Trust Worthing Priority Care Services NHS Trust
	Source: Department of Health website

NHS: Congestion Charge

Baroness Noakes: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What is their estimate of the cost of resources in primary care trusts, National Health Service trusts and other bodies which will be involved in processing claims for congestion charge refunds.

Baroness Andrews: The Department of Health does not hold this information.

NHS: Congestion Charge

Baroness Noakes: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many National Health Service staff and general practitioners are able to reclaim the London congestion charge; and what procedures they must follow to obtain payment.

Baroness Andrews: Under the NHS congestion charging reimbursement scheme, any NHS employee and general practitioner who meets the eligibility criteria of the scheme is able to reclaim the London congestion charge.

Special Educational Needs

Lord Pearson of Rannoch: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What are the proportions of parents using the special educational needs tribunals who want for their children (a) mainstream school places and (b) places in special schools.

Baroness Ashton of Upholland: During the school year 2001–02 the Special Educational Needs and Disability Tribunal registered a total of 3,048 appeals, of which 1,107 concerned the school to be named in the child's statement. Parents requested mainstream schools in 467 of these appeals and special schools in 570. In the remaining 70 appeals parents either requested home tuition or did not specify the school or type of school that should be named in the statement. bjc

Shipbuilding

Lord Dixon: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When they will respond to the proposals submitted by the Shipbuilders and Shiprepairers Association, Society of Maritime Industries and the British Marine Federation for follow-on funding to the current "Link" project, which is wholly committed and expires at the end of 2003; and
	What new schemes they have to assist the British shipbuilding and ship repairing industry.

Lord Sainsbury of Turville: A proposal was submitted to my department in January 2003 by the Shipbuilders and Shiprepairers Association (SSA), acting in conjunction with the Society of Maritime Industries (SMI) and the British Marine Federation (BMF), for a further grant towards their Marine Industry Improvement Partnership. This application was very much at a conceptual level and contained no details of the number of companies to be assisted, nor the amount of grant being sought (although another related submission to the steering group of the Shipbuilding and Marine Industries Forum indicated that grants in excess of £5 million were likely to be requested).
	This proposal has subsequently been discussed at meetings of the steering group of the Shipbuilding and Marine Industries Forum, most recently on 18 March 2003, as well as at a meeting held on 31 March of the SSA's steering group, which is managing the current £2.8 million grant.
	The SSA, SMI and BMF attend the Shipbuilding and Marine Industries Forum and officials of my Marine Unit attend both the Shipbuilding and Marine Industries Forum and the SSA's steering group.
	My officials have pointed out to the SSA that, before consideration could be given to further grants, the SSA would have to provide my officials with a full economic evaluation of the outcomes of the existing grant compared with the targets which were offered by the SSA in their first grant application. This evaluation has yet to start. More generally, the emphasis for DTI's entire business support programme for industry has been evolving over recent months in response to feedback from key stakeholders. I lead the Innovation Review, which will set out a strategy and action plan to improve innovation performance in the UK. In parallel with this, the implementation of the review of DTI business support is leading to a small number of new products clearly targeted at enhancing UK competitiveness. As a result, a smaller number of new business support products are being developed which will be broad, flexible and targeted at the needs of the customer, while aimed at driving up productivity through strategic investments in four key areas of activity: innovation, enterprise and best practice, investment and skills.
	Within this approach to business support, DTI will continue to make investments in areas where evidence shows a real difference can be made to UK productivity and competitiveness, and where the market has failed to provide solutions to business needs. Proposals will be considered accordingly and those submitted by the Shipbuilders and Shiprepairers Association, Society of Maritime Industries and the British Marine Federation will be part of this process.
	Meanwhile the first new business support products are starting to be rolled-out and more will follow in the course of the year.
	My officials will continue to keep in close touch with the Shipbuilders and Shiprepairers Association, Society of Marine Industries and the British Marine Federation on this and other topics.

Shipbuilding

Lord Dixon: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How much money the British shipbuilding industry has received from the Shipbuilding Intervention Fund.

Lord Sainsbury of Turville: Payments under the Shipbuilding Intervention Fund in the last five years have been:
	
		
			  £ millions 
			 FY 1997–98 7.01 
			 FY 1998–99 10.54 
			 FY 1999–2000 3.99 
			 FY 2000–01 4.22 
			 FY 2001–02 5.65 
		
	
	Estimated payments in FY 2002–03 will be in the order of £1.2 million. The Shipbuilding Intervention Fund was closed to new applications on 31 December 2000 in line with the withdrawal of contract subsidies across the EU.

Software Piracy

The Earl of Northesk: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	In the light of a recent study from the Business Software Alliance suggesting that reductions in software piracy can lead to improved national economic performance, whether existing measures in the United Kingdom to address this problem are sufficient.

Lord Sainsbury of Turville: We believe existing measures to support software licensing in the UK are sufficient. According to figures produced by the Business Software Alliance, we enjoy, jointly with the USA, the world's best compliance rate for business software licensing and the fastest software sector growth rate in Western Europe.

Hull: Human Rights

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Who or what is responsible for the delivery and safeguard of human rights in the city of Hull.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: Section 6 of the Human Rights Act 1998 places a duty on all public authorities to act compatibly with the convention rights. "Public authority" includes a court or tribunal and bodies such as the police and local authorities. It also includes any private organisation with a public function.

Medical Compensation:Conditional Fee Agreements

Lord Chan: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What is their response to the growing number of commercial underwriters who encourage those seeking to claim compensation for medical accidents to use their services to cover "no win no fee" arrangements.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: Conditional fee arrangements ("no win no fee") supported by insurance policies can provide access to justice for individuals seeking to pursue meritorious clinical negligence cases but who are ineligible for legal aid. The insurance market provides a range of cover and is continuing to develop new products to support conditional fee agreements for civil actions including clinical negligence cases where the risks and legal costs are generally higher.

European Social Fund Objective 3Co-Financing

Lord Harris of Haringey: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer of 27 March by the Baroness Hollis of Heigham (WA 87), why if only three tenders by European Social Fund Objective 3 co-financing in respect of capacity building have been rejected because their documentation was not completed properly, Jobcentre Plus produce a pro forma letter of rejection for applicants with tick boxes indicating the grounds for rejection, (for example, that the font size was too small); and whether this approach to voluntary organisations is consistent with the desire for capacity building.

Baroness Hollis of Heigham: The Government are satisfied that the tendering arrangements applied by Jobcentre Plus in respect of ESF co-financing are clear and fair, and that they allow for promoting capacity building in the voluntary sector. The arrangements comply with the rules for implementing the ESF and are designed to ensure that public money is used to support projects that aim to offer better quality and more effective services for the unemployed and disadvantaged people that this Government are trying to help.
	Jobcentre Plus has a standard procedure for indicating to tenderers why their tender has been rejected. This is done on a pro forma which has been developed for use in all procurement competitions that Jobcentre Plus holds. The standards for tenders are clearly stated when the competition is called. Potential tenderers are able to seek clarification of these procedures at pre-tender meetings or from contract teams. Providers are also invited to discuss the reason for rejection so that they can meet requirements in future tenders.

Funeral Services: Costs

Earl Russell: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to paragraph 5.22 of the Budget report (HC 500), whether they know what percentage of undertakers provide a funeral service costing less than £700; and, if so, what is the percentage.

Baroness Hollis of Heigham: We are committed to providing payment for a respectful funeral to people receiving income-related benefits or tax credits who have a good reason for organising the funeral.
	Social Fund funeral payments cover in full the cost of certain necessary, specified charges including fees levied by burial authorities and crematoria. An additional sum is also allowed for other funeral expenses which gives the person arranging the funeral the freedom to select the items or services they consider appropriate. This additional sum, previously up to £600, was increased to a maximum of £700 from 7 April, as announced by my right honourable friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer in his Budget Report.
	The department does not collect information on the cost of individual funeral services.

Budget

Lord Blackwell: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What rise in tax receipts would result from a 1 per cent rise in nominal Gross Domestic Product and its components assuming no indexation of allowances, following implementation of measures in the Budget statement on 9 April.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: Latest available projections of tax revenues are available in budget 2003 (HC 500). They are based on a deliberately prudent and cautious assumption that trend output growth is ¼ percentage point lower than the Government's neutral view. This corresponds to the lower end of the range of HM Treasury's economic forecasts. Tax forecasts based on alternative forecasts of GDP growth are not available.

Export of Live Horses for Slaughter

Lord Higgins: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will ban the export of live horses for slaughter.

Lord Whitty: Although horses may be exported for slaughter, no one has applied for a licence to export from Great Britain in many years.